Farage steps in to defend Clarkson

Ukip leader Nigel Farage has stepped into the Top Gear racism row to defend Jeremy Clarkson, saying the TV star had not gone over the line of being offensive.

The BBC has put the presenter on a final warning over the controversy, but Mr Farage said it was "just typical Clarkson".

Clarkson admitted he will be sacked by the broadcaster if he makes another offensive remark, after claims he used the n-word while reciting the nursery rhyme Eeny, Meeny, Miny Moe during filming of the BBC2 programme.

Writing in his weekly Sun column the presenter also attacked the BBC for urging him to apologise over the footage, complaining he could not say sorry for something he had not done.

He said: "I've been told by the BBC that if I make one more offensive remark, anywhere, at any time, I will be sacked.

"And even the angel Gabriel would struggle to survive with that hanging over his head.

"It's inevitable that one day, someone, somewhere will say that I've offended them, and that will be that."

Speaking about the BBC's 'plan' for him to apologise, he added: "But saying sorry for using the most racist word of them all and hoping the story would die down as a result?

"...It's something I hadn't done."

Promoted stories

The star became embroiled in controversy after the Daily Mirror saw unaired footage of him using the nursery rhyme to compare two sports cars and claims the word n***** can be heard.

Clarkson said he "mumbled where the offensive word would normally occur" in two takes, and used the word "teacher" in its place in a third.

Speaking on a campaign visit to Dover, Mr Farage said: "The more controversial Jeremy Clarkson is, the more people watch his programme, and the more money the BBC makes out of marketing a show that sells globally and makes them a fortune.

"I would think it's just typical Clarkson, getting very, very close to the line of being offensive but perhaps not quite going over it."

Mr Farage's intervention comes after Deputy Labour leader Harriet Harman called for the BBC to sack the presenter.

In a Twitter post Ms Harman said: "Anybody who uses the N-word in public or private in whatever context has no place in the British Broadcasting Corporation."

But Education Secretary Michael Gove urged the corporation not to axe Clarkson because he had been "clear in his apology".

In a video posted online, Clarkson said he "did everything in my power to not use that word" and was now "begging your forgiveness for the fact that obviously my efforts weren't quite good enough".

A solemn-looking Clarkson said: "I was mortified by this, horrified. It is a word I loathe."

Clarkson had earlier tweeted: "I did not use the n-word. Never use it. The Mirror has gone way too far this time."

The claims come days after the motoring show's producer apologised for broadcasting a "light-hearted" joke by Clarkson that sparked a complaint of racism.

An episode, filmed in Burma and Thailand and shown in March, featured a scene in which the presenters built a bridge over the River Kwai, and as an Asian man walked over it Clarkson said: "That is a proud moment, but there's a slope on it."

Somi Guha, an actress who complained to the BBC, said the use of the word "slope" was an example of "casual racism" and "gross misconduct".

In recent years Clarkson has been cleared of breaching the broadcasting code by watchdog Ofcom after comparing a Japanese car to people with growths on their faces.

Share article

He previously faced a storm of protest from mental health charities after he branded people who throw themselves under trains as ''selfish'' and was forced to apologise for telling BBC1's The One Show that striking workers should be shot.

The motoring show has also faced complaints from Indian and Mexican politicians over remarks made about their countries while filming on location.

Promoted Stories

Comments (41)

Eeny, meeny, miny, mo, One more insult and Clarkson must go, If he hollers, sack him anyway!

Eeny, meeny, miny, mo,
One more insult and Clarkson must go,
If he hollers, sack him anyway!cymruambyth

Eeny, meeny, miny, mo, One more insult and Clarkson must go, If he hollers, sack him anyway!

Score: -10

Katie Re-Registered says...7:35am Sat 3 May 14

Of course once again it goes without saying that racism - like any other form of bigotry - is clearly odious, thoroughly irrational and should always be challenged. However, would this 'warning' be coming from the same BBC that panders to a minority of homophobic viewers by continuing to refuse to have same sex dancing couples on its primetime flagship show Strictly Come Dancing? Hypocrisy strikes again! Moreover, I actually feel that organisations and people who continue to do something they know full well is wrong because they calculate that if they stopped doing it then it would might be 'bad for business' or disadvantageous to them are actually worse than the ignorant bigots whose defence is that they're simply too closed-minded to know any better.

Of course once again it goes without saying that racism - like any other form of bigotry - is clearly odious, thoroughly irrational and should always be challenged.
However, would this 'warning' be coming from the same BBC that panders to a minority of homophobic viewers by continuing to refuse to have same sex dancing couples on its primetime flagship show Strictly Come Dancing? Hypocrisy strikes again!
Moreover, I actually feel that organisations and people who continue to do something they know full well is wrong because they calculate that if they stopped doing it then it would might be 'bad for business' or disadvantageous to them are actually worse than the ignorant bigots whose defence is that they're simply too closed-minded to know any better.Katie Re-Registered

Of course once again it goes without saying that racism - like any other form of bigotry - is clearly odious, thoroughly irrational and should always be challenged. However, would this 'warning' be coming from the same BBC that panders to a minority of homophobic viewers by continuing to refuse to have same sex dancing couples on its primetime flagship show Strictly Come Dancing? Hypocrisy strikes again! Moreover, I actually feel that organisations and people who continue to do something they know full well is wrong because they calculate that if they stopped doing it then it would might be 'bad for business' or disadvantageous to them are actually worse than the ignorant bigots whose defence is that they're simply too closed-minded to know any better.

Score: 3

Say It As It Is OK? says...7:58am Sat 3 May 14

Golly, what a storm in a teacup, leave Jeremy alone to get on and do what he does best. Yes he's an a r s e but he knows that and we love him for it!

Golly, what a storm in a teacup, leave Jeremy alone to get on and do what he does best. Yes he's an a r s e but he knows that and we love him for it!Say It As It Is OK?

Golly, what a storm in a teacup, leave Jeremy alone to get on and do what he does best. Yes he's an a r s e but he knows that and we love him for it!

Score: 25

RNJT1970 says...8:21am Sat 3 May 14

A slope refers to the angle of an object does it not? I have never heard if it in reference to a race before. Is this another case of one or more individuals trying to make something out to be more than was intended? I don't always agree with Mr Clarksons' antics on screen, but he makes the show. Me Clarkson has made Top Gear a trademark, far more than any other motoring program.

A slope refers to the angle of an object does it not? I have never heard if it in reference to a race before. Is this another case of one or more individuals trying to make something out to be more than was intended?
I don't always agree with Mr Clarksons' antics on screen, but he makes the show. Me Clarkson has made Top Gear a trademark, far more than any other motoring program.RNJT1970

A slope refers to the angle of an object does it not? I have never heard if it in reference to a race before. Is this another case of one or more individuals trying to make something out to be more than was intended? I don't always agree with Mr Clarksons' antics on screen, but he makes the show. Me Clarkson has made Top Gear a trademark, far more than any other motoring program.

Score: 19

henjni says...8:35am Sat 3 May 14

My respect for this man is slowly decreasing! Why such arrogance!? I love watching Top Gear, it's ace, but when you spoil the fun with odd racist remarks, it is disappointing and off putting

My respect for this man is slowly decreasing! Why such arrogance!? I love watching Top Gear, it's ace, but when you spoil the fun with odd racist remarks, it is disappointing and off puttinghenjni

My respect for this man is slowly decreasing! Why such arrogance!? I love watching Top Gear, it's ace, but when you spoil the fun with odd racist remarks, it is disappointing and off putting

Score: -23

Jetwasher says...8:52am Sat 3 May 14

I can't see a problem here at all , if you listen to some music N s are always calling or singing about another N, seems very one-sided ?

I can't see a problem here at all , if you listen to some music N s are always calling or singing about another N, seems very one-sided ?Jetwasher

I can't see a problem here at all , if you listen to some music N s are always calling or singing about another N, seems very one-sided ?

Score: 21

Dilligaf2010 says...8:54am Sat 3 May 14

I wish they would just leave the bloke alone, he's made Top Gear what it is, hugely popular in 170 countries with an estimated 350 million viewers. I've seen the clip, and he mumbles, just as he said. It seems as though there are many journalists that are jealous of his success, and his wealth, so they do everything they can to discredit him.

I wish they would just leave the bloke alone, he's made Top Gear what it is, hugely popular in 170 countries with an estimated 350 million viewers.
I've seen the clip, and he mumbles, just as he said.
It seems as though there are many journalists that are jealous of his success, and his wealth, so they do everything they can to discredit him.Dilligaf2010

I wish they would just leave the bloke alone, he's made Top Gear what it is, hugely popular in 170 countries with an estimated 350 million viewers. I've seen the clip, and he mumbles, just as he said. It seems as though there are many journalists that are jealous of his success, and his wealth, so they do everything they can to discredit him.

Score: 23

Dilligaf2010 says...8:56am Sat 3 May 14

Jetwasher wrote…

I can't see a problem here at all , if you listen to some music N s are always calling or singing about another N, seems very one-sided ?

Exactly, not that J.C. used the word

[quote][p][bold]Jetwasher[/bold] wrote:
I can't see a problem here at all , if you listen to some music N s are always calling or singing about another N, seems very one-sided ?[/p][/quote]Exactly, not that J.C. used the wordDilligaf2010

Jetwasher wrote…

I can't see a problem here at all , if you listen to some music N s are always calling or singing about another N, seems very one-sided ?

Exactly, not that J.C. used the word

Score: 12

TheBrotherhoodOfTheBell says...9:04am Sat 3 May 14

he does not care he has made £16 Million out of it, in share holdings. if they sack him the independents will take the show, with Clarkson out as the figure head on the BBC show it will die. i have been called all the names under the sun in my time big deal get on with it. i like the bloke, i know he is a toffee nosed tw*t, but he is one you can have a laugh with. if you dont like being called n***er or w*p or slope or whatever, then go back to your own country. my relations are not British so you could say that they are ethnic minorities big deal. when in Rome you do as the Romans do.

he does not care he has made £16 Million out of it, in share holdings.
if they sack him the independents will take the show,
with Clarkson out as the figure head on the BBC show it will die.
i have been called all the names under the sun in my time big deal get on with it.
i like the bloke, i know he is a toffee nosed tw*t, but he is one you can have a laugh with.
if you dont like being called n***er or w*p or slope or whatever, then go back to your own country. my relations are not British so you could say that they are ethnic minorities big deal.
when in Rome you do as the Romans do.TheBrotherhoodOfTheBell

he does not care he has made £16 Million out of it, in share holdings. if they sack him the independents will take the show, with Clarkson out as the figure head on the BBC show it will die. i have been called all the names under the sun in my time big deal get on with it. i like the bloke, i know he is a toffee nosed tw*t, but he is one you can have a laugh with. if you dont like being called n***er or w*p or slope or whatever, then go back to your own country. my relations are not British so you could say that they are ethnic minorities big deal. when in Rome you do as the Romans do.

Score: 26

You don't fool me says...10:03am Sat 3 May 14

If this was a problem Prince Philip should of been sacked years ago! Or is that too controversial for the people sitting at home waiting to be outraged?

If this was a problem Prince Philip should of been sacked years ago! Or is that too controversial for the people sitting at home waiting to be outraged?You don't fool me

If this was a problem Prince Philip should of been sacked years ago! Or is that too controversial for the people sitting at home waiting to be outraged?

Score: 16

nickwilcock says...10:37am Sat 3 May 14

The BBC should be defending their presenter and kicking the wretched Daily Mirror, rather than the converse. Most of Top Gear is scripted and the 'slope' pun was most probably in the script, rather than an off-the-cuff remark. As were James May's utterances in the 'camping' edition, in which 'Strength through Joy' and 'Work makes you free' were clear references to the 'Kraft durch Freude' and 'Arbeit macht Frei' slogans of the Nazi era. No way were those his own words - yet no-one complained. The BBC are making themselves look even more stupid than ever over this leaked out-take....

The BBC should be defending their presenter and kicking the wretched Daily Mirror, rather than the converse.
Most of Top Gear is scripted and the 'slope' pun was most probably in the script, rather than an off-the-cuff remark.
As were James May's utterances in the 'camping' edition, in which 'Strength through Joy' and 'Work makes you free' were clear references to the 'Kraft durch Freude' and 'Arbeit macht Frei' slogans of the Nazi era. No way were those his own words - yet no-one complained.
The BBC are making themselves look even more stupid than ever over this leaked out-take....nickwilcock

The BBC should be defending their presenter and kicking the wretched Daily Mirror, rather than the converse. Most of Top Gear is scripted and the 'slope' pun was most probably in the script, rather than an off-the-cuff remark. As were James May's utterances in the 'camping' edition, in which 'Strength through Joy' and 'Work makes you free' were clear references to the 'Kraft durch Freude' and 'Arbeit macht Frei' slogans of the Nazi era. No way were those his own words - yet no-one complained. The BBC are making themselves look even more stupid than ever over this leaked out-take....

Score: 18

Robh says...10:42am Sat 3 May 14

Eddie Murphy and many other black actors and comedians regularly use this word so that's OK is it. When JC used the word he did not aim it at anyone it was just an old saying. The trouble is that many people see a word as offensive not it's context.

Eddie Murphy and many other black actors and comedians regularly use this word so that's OK is it. When JC used the word he did not aim it at anyone it was just an old saying.
The trouble is that many people see a word as offensive not it's context.Robh

Eddie Murphy and many other black actors and comedians regularly use this word so that's OK is it. When JC used the word he did not aim it at anyone it was just an old saying. The trouble is that many people see a word as offensive not it's context.

Score: 19

Crossbenchtory says...10:50am Sat 3 May 14

Have we really become so thin skinned in this country?? It is a harmless little children's rhyme, people, sung by me, my parents, my grandparents etc and my children. A word, in and of its self, can not be offensive, it is the context in which a word is used which makes it offensive. For example, in New Zealand the words "coconut" and "fob" may be used as derogatory terms when referring to people of Pacific Island origin, should we ban these words? Should we sack tv chefs who use the word "coconut" in their cooking programmes or pillory anyone who owns a key "fob"? And before the left start ranting that it's not the same thing I would suggest they do some research first. It is analogous as these words are deemed an awful lot more offensive (when used in that context), than the "n" word, by both Pacific Islanders and the general population of New Zealand. The "n" word, indeed, in New Zealand form part of a common greeting between friends, irrespective of race or colour, as in "what's up my n..." It is a good job that being offended isn't a fatal affliction as it seems to me that in modern Britain there are so many people actively searching for something to be offended about it would be like a mass extinction if it were fatal. Grow up people, George Orwell wrote 1984 & Animal Farm as warnings, NOT as a blueprint or manifesto.

Have we really become so thin skinned in this country??
It is a harmless little children's rhyme, people, sung by me, my parents, my grandparents etc and my children.
A word, in and of its self, can not be offensive, it is the context in which a word is used which makes it offensive. For example, in New Zealand the words "coconut" and "fob" may be used as derogatory terms when referring to people of Pacific Island origin, should we ban these words? Should we sack tv chefs who use the word "coconut" in their cooking programmes or pillory anyone who owns a key "fob"?
And before the left start ranting that it's not the same thing I would suggest they do some research first. It is analogous as these words are deemed an awful lot more offensive (when used in that context), than the "n" word, by both Pacific Islanders and the general population of New Zealand. The "n" word, indeed, in New Zealand form part of a common greeting between friends, irrespective of race or colour, as in "what's up my n..."
It is a good job that being offended isn't a fatal affliction as it seems to me that in modern Britain there are so many people actively searching for something to be offended about it would be like a mass extinction if it were fatal.
Grow up people, George Orwell wrote 1984 & Animal Farm as warnings, NOT as a blueprint or manifesto.Crossbenchtory

Have we really become so thin skinned in this country?? It is a harmless little children's rhyme, people, sung by me, my parents, my grandparents etc and my children. A word, in and of its self, can not be offensive, it is the context in which a word is used which makes it offensive. For example, in New Zealand the words "coconut" and "fob" may be used as derogatory terms when referring to people of Pacific Island origin, should we ban these words? Should we sack tv chefs who use the word "coconut" in their cooking programmes or pillory anyone who owns a key "fob"? And before the left start ranting that it's not the same thing I would suggest they do some research first. It is analogous as these words are deemed an awful lot more offensive (when used in that context), than the "n" word, by both Pacific Islanders and the general population of New Zealand. The "n" word, indeed, in New Zealand form part of a common greeting between friends, irrespective of race or colour, as in "what's up my n..." It is a good job that being offended isn't a fatal affliction as it seems to me that in modern Britain there are so many people actively searching for something to be offended about it would be like a mass extinction if it were fatal. Grow up people, George Orwell wrote 1984 & Animal Farm as warnings, NOT as a blueprint or manifesto.

Score: 18

Christof says...11:01am Sat 3 May 14

This country is turning in Russia!! You have to watch what you say or you will get dragged outside and shot!! Yes Clarkson can be a fool and an idiot, but what he said wasn't said with venom or against an individual!! Plus it was said off camera! Yet again......pc gone too far. Watch your p's and q's everyone!

This country is turning in Russia!! You have to watch what you say or you will get dragged outside and shot!!
Yes Clarkson can be a fool and an idiot, but what he said wasn't said with venom or against an individual!! Plus it was said off camera!
Yet again......pc gone too far. Watch your p's and q's everyone!Christof

This country is turning in Russia!! You have to watch what you say or you will get dragged outside and shot!! Yes Clarkson can be a fool and an idiot, but what he said wasn't said with venom or against an individual!! Plus it was said off camera! Yet again......pc gone too far. Watch your p's and q's everyone!

Score: 16

Lefkadis says...11:04am Sat 3 May 14

Jeremy Clarkson has pocketed a £16,000,000 fortune from the BBC and is well-known, as are his co-presenters at 'Top Gear' for ignorant, nationalistic, racist, upper class, right-wing and anti-working class comments so he will not be the least concerned about the latest criticisms. When he goes, and many hope it is soon, others will follow in his footsteps. He makes me squirm.

Jeremy Clarkson has pocketed a £16,000,000 fortune from the BBC and is well-known, as are his co-presenters at 'Top Gear' for ignorant, nationalistic, racist, upper class, right-wing and anti-working class comments so he will not be the least concerned about the latest criticisms.
When he goes, and many hope it is soon, others will follow in his footsteps. He makes me squirm.Lefkadis

Jeremy Clarkson has pocketed a £16,000,000 fortune from the BBC and is well-known, as are his co-presenters at 'Top Gear' for ignorant, nationalistic, racist, upper class, right-wing and anti-working class comments so he will not be the least concerned about the latest criticisms. When he goes, and many hope it is soon, others will follow in his footsteps. He makes me squirm.

Score: -19

Robh says...11:17am Sat 3 May 14

Lefkadis wrote…

Jeremy Clarkson has pocketed a £16,000,000 fortune from the BBC and is well-known, as are his co-presenters at 'Top Gear' for ignorant, nationalistic, racist, upper class, right-wing and anti-working class comments so he will not be the least concerned about the latest criticisms. When he goes, and many hope it is soon, others will follow in his footsteps. He makes me squirm.

So your not prejudiced then.

[quote][p][bold]Lefkadis[/bold] wrote:
Jeremy Clarkson has pocketed a £16,000,000 fortune from the BBC and is well-known, as are his co-presenters at 'Top Gear' for ignorant, nationalistic, racist, upper class, right-wing and anti-working class comments so he will not be the least concerned about the latest criticisms.
When he goes, and many hope it is soon, others will follow in his footsteps. He makes me squirm.[/p][/quote]So your not prejudiced then.Robh

Lefkadis wrote…

Jeremy Clarkson has pocketed a £16,000,000 fortune from the BBC and is well-known, as are his co-presenters at 'Top Gear' for ignorant, nationalistic, racist, upper class, right-wing and anti-working class comments so he will not be the least concerned about the latest criticisms. When he goes, and many hope it is soon, others will follow in his footsteps. He makes me squirm.

So your not prejudiced then.

Score: 17

nickcam says...11:32am Sat 3 May 14

In a Twitter post Ms Harman said: "Anybody who uses the N-word in public or private in whatever context has no place in the British Broadcasting Corporation." In private??? The N word is horrible, but private conversations are private - the clue is in the word.

In a Twitter post Ms Harman said: "Anybody who uses the N-word in public or private in whatever context has no place in the British Broadcasting Corporation."
In private??? The N word is horrible, but private conversations are private - the clue is in the word.nickcam

In a Twitter post Ms Harman said: "Anybody who uses the N-word in public or private in whatever context has no place in the British Broadcasting Corporation." In private??? The N word is horrible, but private conversations are private - the clue is in the word.

Score: 20

Crossbenchtory says...11:41am Sat 3 May 14

nickcam wrote…

In a Twitter post Ms Harman said: "Anybody who uses the N-word in public or private in whatever context has no place in the British Broadcasting Corporation." In private??? The N word is horrible, but private conversations are private - the clue is in the word.

I would suggest to Ms Harman that anyone who in any way supports an organisation, "either in public or private in whatever context," which promotes child molestation has no place in the Palace of Westminster. Now, which of these things is more serious in the actual, tangible, harm caused? I expect to hear about your resignation from Parliament on the 6 o'clock tonight Ms Harman, although applying the rule of rank hypocrisy I won't hold my breath.

[quote][p][bold]nickcam[/bold] wrote:
In a Twitter post Ms Harman said: "Anybody who uses the N-word in public or private in whatever context has no place in the British Broadcasting Corporation."
In private??? The N word is horrible, but private conversations are private - the clue is in the word.[/p][/quote]I would suggest to Ms Harman that anyone who in any way supports an organisation, "either in public or private in whatever context," which promotes child molestation has no place in the Palace of Westminster.
Now, which of these things is more serious in the actual, tangible, harm caused?
I expect to hear about your resignation from Parliament on the 6 o'clock tonight Ms Harman, although applying the rule of rank hypocrisy I won't hold my breath.Crossbenchtory

nickcam wrote…

In a Twitter post Ms Harman said: "Anybody who uses the N-word in public or private in whatever context has no place in the British Broadcasting Corporation." In private??? The N word is horrible, but private conversations are private - the clue is in the word.

I would suggest to Ms Harman that anyone who in any way supports an organisation, "either in public or private in whatever context," which promotes child molestation has no place in the Palace of Westminster. Now, which of these things is more serious in the actual, tangible, harm caused? I expect to hear about your resignation from Parliament on the 6 o'clock tonight Ms Harman, although applying the rule of rank hypocrisy I won't hold my breath.

Score: 18

welshmen says...1:15pm Sat 3 May 14

Good News Jezza....

Good News Jezza....welshmen

Good News Jezza....

Score: 3

burgerboy says...1:16pm Sat 3 May 14

So we can't sing Olivers Army or watch the dam busters film because the name of Guy Gibsons dog..............

So we can't sing Olivers Army or watch the dam busters film because the name of Guy Gibsons dog..............burgerboy

So we can't sing Olivers Army or watch the dam busters film because the name of Guy Gibsons dog..............

Score: 16

Robh says...3:09pm Sat 3 May 14

Some one has always got to apply these words to a particular ethnic race or culture to prove they are offensive. I think the most offensive thing is precisely that, people giving an offensive meaning to words. They are more racist than anyone else as they are assuming the meanings of words and making them offensive.

Some one has always got to apply these words to a particular ethnic race or culture to prove they are offensive. I think the most offensive thing is precisely that, people giving an offensive meaning to words. They are more racist than anyone else as they are assuming the meanings of words and making them offensive.Robh

Some one has always got to apply these words to a particular ethnic race or culture to prove they are offensive. I think the most offensive thing is precisely that, people giving an offensive meaning to words. They are more racist than anyone else as they are assuming the meanings of words and making them offensive.

Score: 6

Jimmy1989 says...3:34pm Sat 3 May 14

Robh wrote…

Some one has always got to apply these words to a particular ethnic race or culture to prove they are offensive. I think the most offensive thing is precisely that, people giving an offensive meaning to words. They are more racist than anyone else as they are assuming the meanings of words and making them offensive.

Yes, initially, but no, not necessarily. If the n-word is used in a private setting, how is that a positive use of the word? This approach just exempts the word from being offensive publicly white enabling it to carry its multifaceted denotative & connotative inclinations away from any direct altercation. In a way, this approach is more offensive, for you can remain offensive without being perceived as offensive. I don't think Jeremy Clarkson in particular is "more racist" for implementing the word in an unusual way, because, in this case, history will always repeat itself; that is, there will always be someone who believes that the use of the n-word, divorced from its original historical context (whilst actually not separated at all), can continue to be legitimated.

[quote][p][bold]Robh[/bold] wrote:
Some one has always got to apply these words to a particular ethnic race or culture to prove they are offensive. I think the most offensive thing is precisely that, people giving an offensive meaning to words. They are more racist than anyone else as they are assuming the meanings of words and making them offensive.[/p][/quote]Yes, initially, but no, not necessarily. If the n-word is used in a private setting, how is that a positive use of the word? This approach just exempts the word from being offensive publicly white enabling it to carry its multifaceted denotative & connotative inclinations away from any direct altercation. In a way, this approach is more offensive, for you can remain offensive without being perceived as offensive.
I don't think Jeremy Clarkson in particular is "more racist" for implementing the word in an unusual way, because, in this case, history will always repeat itself; that is, there will always be someone who believes that the use of the n-word, divorced from its original historical context (whilst actually not separated at all), can continue to be legitimated.Jimmy1989

Robh wrote…

Some one has always got to apply these words to a particular ethnic race or culture to prove they are offensive. I think the most offensive thing is precisely that, people giving an offensive meaning to words. They are more racist than anyone else as they are assuming the meanings of words and making them offensive.

Yes, initially, but no, not necessarily. If the n-word is used in a private setting, how is that a positive use of the word? This approach just exempts the word from being offensive publicly white enabling it to carry its multifaceted denotative & connotative inclinations away from any direct altercation. In a way, this approach is more offensive, for you can remain offensive without being perceived as offensive. I don't think Jeremy Clarkson in particular is "more racist" for implementing the word in an unusual way, because, in this case, history will always repeat itself; that is, there will always be someone who believes that the use of the n-word, divorced from its original historical context (whilst actually not separated at all), can continue to be legitimated.

Score: 2

Crossbenchtory says...3:52pm Sat 3 May 14

Of course the bigger question is how are people going to go camping this summer if they can't go into a shop and buy poles? I mean to say, how offensive is that, with the rates of people trafficking for the sex trade in Eastern Europe, to go into a shop and ask to buy a pole is just beyond the pale, tut tut

Of course the bigger question is how are people going to go camping this summer if they can't go into a shop and buy poles?
I mean to say, how offensive is that, with the rates of people trafficking for the sex trade in Eastern Europe, to go into a shop and ask to buy a pole is just beyond the pale, tut tutCrossbenchtory

Of course the bigger question is how are people going to go camping this summer if they can't go into a shop and buy poles? I mean to say, how offensive is that, with the rates of people trafficking for the sex trade in Eastern Europe, to go into a shop and ask to buy a pole is just beyond the pale, tut tut

Score: 3

Not so simple says...3:55pm Sat 3 May 14

I wonder if the public are aware of rap/ street music which has no limit on the offensive word count. Then again I reckon top gear should move to after the watershed as that way adults can be mature about comments made during the show. Then again, the BBC probably knows best

I wonder if the public are aware of rap/ street music which has no limit on the offensive word count.
Then again I reckon top gear should move to after the watershed as that way adults can be mature about comments made during the show.
Then again, the BBC probably knows bestNot so simple

I wonder if the public are aware of rap/ street music which has no limit on the offensive word count. Then again I reckon top gear should move to after the watershed as that way adults can be mature about comments made during the show. Then again, the BBC probably knows best

Score: 4

Jimmy1989 says...4:00pm Sat 3 May 14

"This broad brush approach, based on skin colour, not only ignores completely the ethnic diversity comprised in the ancestry of New Zealand and it's inhabitants but indicates that you differentiate between people based on the colour of their skin. That is quite disgusting really, isn't it." No, you attempted to draw a disparaging comparison which wasn't conducive to the article or to your own concerns regarding ethnic diversity. & if you read my comment closely, you'd notice my repeated convergence on the n-word & other offensive remarks, which is the substance of the article. My point was that the n-word is recognised, will always be recognised, should always be recognised, as an offensive remark to those of the African diaspora, even if the term is used as a casual, "common greeting". Are you suggesting that Britain should adopt this custom? I find it disgusting that, as a black man, I'm being patronised into a condescending way of thinking that discourages my skin colour & my history, in which the n-word will always be a part of. JK uses this word willy-nilly & I get told to shut up, or at least you are permitted to speak up about your concerns, when I shouldn't have to voice any objection to the word in the first place?

"This broad brush approach, based on skin colour, not only ignores completely the ethnic diversity comprised in the ancestry of New Zealand and it's inhabitants but indicates that you differentiate between people based on the colour of their skin. That is quite disgusting really, isn't it."
No, you attempted to draw a disparaging comparison which wasn't conducive to the article or to your own concerns regarding ethnic diversity. & if you read my comment closely, you'd notice my repeated convergence on the n-word & other offensive remarks, which is the substance of the article. My point was that the n-word is recognised, will always be recognised, should always be recognised, as an offensive remark to those of the African diaspora, even if the term is used as a casual, "common greeting". Are you suggesting that Britain should adopt this custom? I find it disgusting that, as a black man, I'm being patronised into a condescending way of thinking that discourages my skin colour & my history, in which the n-word will always be a part of. JK uses this word willy-nilly & I get told to shut up, or at least you are permitted to speak up about your concerns, when I shouldn't have to voice any objection to the word in the first place?Jimmy1989

"This broad brush approach, based on skin colour, not only ignores completely the ethnic diversity comprised in the ancestry of New Zealand and it's inhabitants but indicates that you differentiate between people based on the colour of their skin. That is quite disgusting really, isn't it." No, you attempted to draw a disparaging comparison which wasn't conducive to the article or to your own concerns regarding ethnic diversity. & if you read my comment closely, you'd notice my repeated convergence on the n-word & other offensive remarks, which is the substance of the article. My point was that the n-word is recognised, will always be recognised, should always be recognised, as an offensive remark to those of the African diaspora, even if the term is used as a casual, "common greeting". Are you suggesting that Britain should adopt this custom? I find it disgusting that, as a black man, I'm being patronised into a condescending way of thinking that discourages my skin colour & my history, in which the n-word will always be a part of. JK uses this word willy-nilly & I get told to shut up, or at least you are permitted to speak up about your concerns, when I shouldn't have to voice any objection to the word in the first place?

Score: -4

Crossbenchtory says...4:09pm Sat 3 May 14

Jimmy1989 wrote…

"This broad brush approach, based on skin colour, not only ignores completely the ethnic diversity comprised in the ancestry of New Zealand and it's inhabitants but indicates that you differentiate between people based on the colour of their skin. That is quite disgusting really, isn't it." No, you attempted to draw a disparaging comparison which wasn't conducive to the article or to your own concerns regarding ethnic diversity. & if you read my comment closely, you'd notice my repeated convergence on the n-word & other offensive remarks, which is the substance of the article. My point was that the n-word is recognised, will always be recognised, should always be recognised, as an offensive remark to those of the African diaspora, even if the term is used as a casual, "common greeting". Are you suggesting that Britain should adopt this custom? I find it disgusting that, as a black man, I'm being patronised into a condescending way of thinking that discourages my skin colour & my history, in which the n-word will always be a part of. JK uses this word willy-nilly & I get told to shut up, or at least you are permitted to speak up about your concerns, when I shouldn't have to voice any objection to the word in the first place?

And now, I note that you have brought your skin colour into the discussion, the last refuse of the desperate and again an indication of your own racist tendencies. The fact remains that no word can offensive in and of itself, it is entirely a matter of context. When I hear, or see, the word n... I think of my first Gun Dog, who was a Black Labrador whom I adored and was very upset when he died after many years as an integral part of my family. Hardly offensive one thinks.

[quote][p][bold]Jimmy1989[/bold] wrote:
"This broad brush approach, based on skin colour, not only ignores completely the ethnic diversity comprised in the ancestry of New Zealand and it's inhabitants but indicates that you differentiate between people based on the colour of their skin. That is quite disgusting really, isn't it."
No, you attempted to draw a disparaging comparison which wasn't conducive to the article or to your own concerns regarding ethnic diversity. & if you read my comment closely, you'd notice my repeated convergence on the n-word & other offensive remarks, which is the substance of the article. My point was that the n-word is recognised, will always be recognised, should always be recognised, as an offensive remark to those of the African diaspora, even if the term is used as a casual, "common greeting". Are you suggesting that Britain should adopt this custom? I find it disgusting that, as a black man, I'm being patronised into a condescending way of thinking that discourages my skin colour & my history, in which the n-word will always be a part of. JK uses this word willy-nilly & I get told to shut up, or at least you are permitted to speak up about your concerns, when I shouldn't have to voice any objection to the word in the first place?[/p][/quote]And now, I note that you have brought your skin colour into the discussion, the last refuse of the desperate and again an indication of your own racist tendencies.
The fact remains that no word can offensive in and of itself, it is entirely a matter of context. When I hear, or see, the word n... I think of my first Gun Dog, who was a Black Labrador whom I adored and was very upset when he died after many years as an integral part of my family. Hardly offensive one thinks.Crossbenchtory

Jimmy1989 wrote…

"This broad brush approach, based on skin colour, not only ignores completely the ethnic diversity comprised in the ancestry of New Zealand and it's inhabitants but indicates that you differentiate between people based on the colour of their skin. That is quite disgusting really, isn't it." No, you attempted to draw a disparaging comparison which wasn't conducive to the article or to your own concerns regarding ethnic diversity. & if you read my comment closely, you'd notice my repeated convergence on the n-word & other offensive remarks, which is the substance of the article. My point was that the n-word is recognised, will always be recognised, should always be recognised, as an offensive remark to those of the African diaspora, even if the term is used as a casual, "common greeting". Are you suggesting that Britain should adopt this custom? I find it disgusting that, as a black man, I'm being patronised into a condescending way of thinking that discourages my skin colour & my history, in which the n-word will always be a part of. JK uses this word willy-nilly & I get told to shut up, or at least you are permitted to speak up about your concerns, when I shouldn't have to voice any objection to the word in the first place?

And now, I note that you have brought your skin colour into the discussion, the last refuse of the desperate and again an indication of your own racist tendencies. The fact remains that no word can offensive in and of itself, it is entirely a matter of context. When I hear, or see, the word n... I think of my first Gun Dog, who was a Black Labrador whom I adored and was very upset when he died after many years as an integral part of my family. Hardly offensive one thinks.

Score: 5

Tttoommy says...4:18pm Sat 3 May 14

I assume Harriet harperson is only talking about white ppl at the BBc using the N word? after all ppl of colour use it, even in their songs whilst they talk of beating up their b1tches - but does any one dare complAIN? Probably Harriets doing this for completely selfish political reasons as Clarksons a Tory and she's been getting it in the neck over some paedo story.

I assume Harriet harperson is only talking about white ppl at the BBc using the N word? after all ppl of colour use it, even in their songs whilst they talk of beating up their b1tches - but does any one dare complAIN?
Probably Harriets doing this for completely selfish political reasons as Clarksons a Tory and she's been getting it in the neck over some paedo story.Tttoommy

I assume Harriet harperson is only talking about white ppl at the BBc using the N word? after all ppl of colour use it, even in their songs whilst they talk of beating up their b1tches - but does any one dare complAIN? Probably Harriets doing this for completely selfish political reasons as Clarksons a Tory and she's been getting it in the neck over some paedo story.

Score: 10

Jimmy1989 says...4:34pm Sat 3 May 14

Crossbenchtory wrote…

Jimmy1989 wrote…

"This broad brush approach, based on skin colour, not only ignores completely the ethnic diversity comprised in the ancestry of New Zealand and it's inhabitants but indicates that you differentiate between people based on the colour of their skin. That is quite disgusting really, isn't it."And now, I note that you have brought your skin colour into the discussion, the last refuse of the desperate and again an indication of your own racist tendencies. The fact remains that no word can offensive in and of itself, it is entirely a matter of context. When I hear, or see, the word n... I think of my first Gun Dog, who was a Black Labrador whom I adored and was very upset when he died after many years as an integral part of my family. Hardly offensive one thinks." Well when you're brining attention to the subject ETHNIC DIVERSITY, of course I'm going to talk about, skin colour & the usage of the ethnically dividing n-word. Being black, I don't call my white or Asian counterparts, for instance, n*ggers, or think of that word when I see or hear them; I don't call my house or my fiancé a n*gger; so I'm not sure how you believe I wouldn't, or shouldn't be offended by the fact that the n-word reminds you of your black Labrador. Again, not offensive to you, but offensive to me... It's not that your Labrador was black (though that is some coincidence), it's that the n-word connotes positive memories of the dog. It's just a bit perverse. And OF COURSE I'M GOING TO BRING MY SKIN COLOUR INTO IT. THE WHOLE ARTICLE IS CENTRED ON THE N-WORD, WHICH I HOPE I DON'T HAVE TO TELL YOU WHAT THAT WORD MEANS.

[quote][p][bold]Crossbenchtory[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Jimmy1989[/bold] wrote:
"This broad brush approach, based on skin colour, not only ignores completely the ethnic diversity comprised in the ancestry of New Zealand and it's inhabitants but indicates that you differentiate between people based on the colour of their skin. That is quite disgusting really, isn't it."And now, I note that you have brought your skin colour into the discussion, the last refuse of the desperate and again an indication of your own racist tendencies.
The fact remains that no word can offensive in and of itself, it is entirely a matter of context. When I hear, or see, the word n... I think of my first Gun Dog, who was a Black Labrador whom I adored and was very upset when he died after many years as an integral part of my family. Hardly offensive one thinks."
Well when you're brining attention to the subject ETHNIC DIVERSITY, of course I'm going to talk about, skin colour & the usage of the ethnically dividing n-word.
Being black, I don't call my white or Asian counterparts, for instance, n*ggers, or think of that word when I see or hear them; I don't call my house or my fiancé a n*gger; so I'm not sure how you believe I wouldn't, or shouldn't be offended by the fact that the n-word reminds you of your black Labrador. Again, not offensive to you, but offensive to me... It's not that your Labrador was black (though that is some coincidence), it's that the n-word connotes positive memories of the dog. It's just a bit perverse.
And OF COURSE I'M GOING TO BRING MY SKIN COLOUR INTO IT. THE WHOLE ARTICLE IS CENTRED ON THE N-WORD, WHICH I HOPE I DON'T HAVE TO TELL YOU WHAT THAT WORD MEANS.Jimmy1989

Crossbenchtory wrote…

Jimmy1989 wrote…

"This broad brush approach, based on skin colour, not only ignores completely the ethnic diversity comprised in the ancestry of New Zealand and it's inhabitants but indicates that you differentiate between people based on the colour of their skin. That is quite disgusting really, isn't it."And now, I note that you have brought your skin colour into the discussion, the last refuse of the desperate and again an indication of your own racist tendencies. The fact remains that no word can offensive in and of itself, it is entirely a matter of context. When I hear, or see, the word n... I think of my first Gun Dog, who was a Black Labrador whom I adored and was very upset when he died after many years as an integral part of my family. Hardly offensive one thinks." Well when you're brining attention to the subject ETHNIC DIVERSITY, of course I'm going to talk about, skin colour & the usage of the ethnically dividing n-word. Being black, I don't call my white or Asian counterparts, for instance, n*ggers, or think of that word when I see or hear them; I don't call my house or my fiancé a n*gger; so I'm not sure how you believe I wouldn't, or shouldn't be offended by the fact that the n-word reminds you of your black Labrador. Again, not offensive to you, but offensive to me... It's not that your Labrador was black (though that is some coincidence), it's that the n-word connotes positive memories of the dog. It's just a bit perverse. And OF COURSE I'M GOING TO BRING MY SKIN COLOUR INTO IT. THE WHOLE ARTICLE IS CENTRED ON THE N-WORD, WHICH I HOPE I DON'T HAVE TO TELL YOU WHAT THAT WORD MEANS.

Score: -13

Jimmy1989 says...4:42pm Sat 3 May 14

Tttoommy wrote…

I assume Harriet harperson is only talking about white ppl at the BBc using the N word? after all ppl of colour use it, even in their songs whilst they talk of beating up their b1tches - but does any one dare complAIN? Probably Harriets doing this for completely selfish political reasons as Clarksons a Tory and she's been getting it in the neck over some paedo story.

"I assume Harriet harperson is only talking about white ppl at the BBc using the N word? after all ppl of colour use it, even in their songs whilst they talk of beating up their b1tches - but does any one dare complAIN?" So, are you complaining of the fact that people of colour can use the n-word with so much autonomy and you can't? And as for "beating up their b1tches", you're not going to get very far with that...

[quote][p][bold]Tttoommy[/bold] wrote:
I assume Harriet harperson is only talking about white ppl at the BBc using the N word? after all ppl of colour use it, even in their songs whilst they talk of beating up their b1tches - but does any one dare complAIN?
Probably Harriets doing this for completely selfish political reasons as Clarksons a Tory and she's been getting it in the neck over some paedo story.[/p][/quote]"I assume Harriet harperson is only talking about white ppl at the BBc using the N word? after all ppl of colour use it, even in their songs whilst they talk of beating up their b1tches - but does any one dare complAIN?"
So, are you complaining of the fact that people of colour can use the n-word with so much autonomy and you can't? And as for "beating up their b1tches", you're not going to get very far with that...Jimmy1989

Tttoommy wrote…

I assume Harriet harperson is only talking about white ppl at the BBc using the N word? after all ppl of colour use it, even in their songs whilst they talk of beating up their b1tches - but does any one dare complAIN? Probably Harriets doing this for completely selfish political reasons as Clarksons a Tory and she's been getting it in the neck over some paedo story.

"I assume Harriet harperson is only talking about white ppl at the BBc using the N word? after all ppl of colour use it, even in their songs whilst they talk of beating up their b1tches - but does any one dare complAIN?" So, are you complaining of the fact that people of colour can use the n-word with so much autonomy and you can't? And as for "beating up their b1tches", you're not going to get very far with that...

Score: -4

Crossbenchtory says...4:48pm Sat 3 May 14

And my entire point, once again, is that a word, in and of it self, can not be offensive, it is the context in which it is used which is offensive. If I use the word "dirty" to describe my car at the moment, that is not offensive, if I use the word "black" to describe the colour of my car, that is not offensive. If, however, I called the man up the road a "dirty black" that would be offensive. It is the context which is offensive. To try to argue anything else is to pervert and twist the English language. If you wish to be offended by a word, because of that word rather than the context in which it is used, then that is your problem. And if you wish to be offended because you think some one said something which sounded like a word which you are offended by, rather than it's context, then again that is your problem.

And my entire point, once again, is that a word, in and of it self, can not be offensive, it is the context in which it is used which is offensive.
If I use the word "dirty" to describe my car at the moment, that is not offensive, if I use the word "black" to describe the colour of my car, that is not offensive. If, however, I called the man up the road a "dirty black" that would be offensive. It is the context which is offensive.
To try to argue anything else is to pervert and twist the English language. If you wish to be offended by a word, because of that word rather than the context in which it is used, then that is your problem. And if you wish to be offended because you think some one said something which sounded like a word which you are offended by, rather than it's context, then again that is your problem.Crossbenchtory

And my entire point, once again, is that a word, in and of it self, can not be offensive, it is the context in which it is used which is offensive. If I use the word "dirty" to describe my car at the moment, that is not offensive, if I use the word "black" to describe the colour of my car, that is not offensive. If, however, I called the man up the road a "dirty black" that would be offensive. It is the context which is offensive. To try to argue anything else is to pervert and twist the English language. If you wish to be offended by a word, because of that word rather than the context in which it is used, then that is your problem. And if you wish to be offended because you think some one said something which sounded like a word which you are offended by, rather than it's context, then again that is your problem.

Score: 4

melchett says...6:16pm Sat 3 May 14

While reading all these comments on this subject my attention wandered to my bookcase looking for a certain first edition novel by Agatha Christie 1939 cir and there it was, I wonder what she would have made of all this if she was around today..

While reading all these comments on this subject my attention wandered to my bookcase looking for a certain first edition novel by Agatha Christie 1939 cir and there it was, I wonder what she would have made of all this if she was around today..melchett

While reading all these comments on this subject my attention wandered to my bookcase looking for a certain first edition novel by Agatha Christie 1939 cir and there it was, I wonder what she would have made of all this if she was around today..

Score: 2

RollandSmoke says...7:01pm Sat 3 May 14

Lets stop messing about and just scrap the BBC as a whole. They are nothing more than a propaganda mouthpiece who think nothing of fabricating stories to give the Government an excuse to take us to war as they tried and failed to do with Syria. They are currently ramming Farage and his party down our throats on a daily basis. What other parties outside the three major ones get anything like the same amount of airtime?. Get shut of the BBC and perhaps some of the population might start thinking for themselves. There is no longer any justification for us to pay our license free knowing full well we are being lied to. UKIP is a psyop, don't fall for it.

Lets stop messing about and just scrap the BBC as a whole. They are nothing more than a propaganda mouthpiece who think nothing of fabricating stories to give the Government an excuse to take us to war as they tried and failed to do with Syria. They are currently ramming Farage and his party down our throats on a daily basis. What other parties outside the three major ones get anything like the same amount of airtime?. Get shut of the BBC and perhaps some of the population might start thinking for themselves. There is no longer any justification for us to pay our license free knowing full well we are being lied to. UKIP is a psyop, don't fall for it.RollandSmoke

Lets stop messing about and just scrap the BBC as a whole. They are nothing more than a propaganda mouthpiece who think nothing of fabricating stories to give the Government an excuse to take us to war as they tried and failed to do with Syria. They are currently ramming Farage and his party down our throats on a daily basis. What other parties outside the three major ones get anything like the same amount of airtime?. Get shut of the BBC and perhaps some of the population might start thinking for themselves. There is no longer any justification for us to pay our license free knowing full well we are being lied to. UKIP is a psyop, don't fall for it.

Score: -8

Mike Roland says...7:01pm Sat 3 May 14

Crossbenchtory wrote…

Jimmy1989 wrote…

"This broad brush approach, based on skin colour, not only ignores completely the ethnic diversity comprised in the ancestry of New Zealand and it's inhabitants but indicates that you differentiate between people based on the colour of their skin. That is quite disgusting really, isn't it." No, you attempted to draw a disparaging comparison which wasn't conducive to the article or to your own concerns regarding ethnic diversity. & if you read my comment closely, you'd notice my repeated convergence on the n-word & other offensive remarks, which is the substance of the article. My point was that the n-word is recognised, will always be recognised, should always be recognised, as an offensive remark to those of the African diaspora, even if the term is used as a casual, "common greeting". Are you suggesting that Britain should adopt this custom? I find it disgusting that, as a black man, I'm being patronised into a condescending way of thinking that discourages my skin colour & my history, in which the n-word will always be a part of. JK uses this word willy-nilly & I get told to shut up, or at least you are permitted to speak up about your concerns, when I shouldn't have to voice any objection to the word in the first place?

And now, I note that you have brought your skin colour into the discussion, the last refuse of the desperate and again an indication of your own racist tendencies. The fact remains that no word can offensive in and of itself, it is entirely a matter of context. When I hear, or see, the word n... I think of my first Gun Dog, who was a Black Labrador whom I adored and was very upset when he died after many years as an integral part of my family. Hardly offensive one thinks.

What a daft name to give a dog!

[quote][p][bold]Crossbenchtory[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Jimmy1989[/bold] wrote:
"This broad brush approach, based on skin colour, not only ignores completely the ethnic diversity comprised in the ancestry of New Zealand and it's inhabitants but indicates that you differentiate between people based on the colour of their skin. That is quite disgusting really, isn't it."
No, you attempted to draw a disparaging comparison which wasn't conducive to the article or to your own concerns regarding ethnic diversity. & if you read my comment closely, you'd notice my repeated convergence on the n-word & other offensive remarks, which is the substance of the article. My point was that the n-word is recognised, will always be recognised, should always be recognised, as an offensive remark to those of the African diaspora, even if the term is used as a casual, "common greeting". Are you suggesting that Britain should adopt this custom? I find it disgusting that, as a black man, I'm being patronised into a condescending way of thinking that discourages my skin colour & my history, in which the n-word will always be a part of. JK uses this word willy-nilly & I get told to shut up, or at least you are permitted to speak up about your concerns, when I shouldn't have to voice any objection to the word in the first place?[/p][/quote]And now, I note that you have brought your skin colour into the discussion, the last refuse of the desperate and again an indication of your own racist tendencies.
The fact remains that no word can offensive in and of itself, it is entirely a matter of context. When I hear, or see, the word n... I think of my first Gun Dog, who was a Black Labrador whom I adored and was very upset when he died after many years as an integral part of my family. Hardly offensive one thinks.[/p][/quote]What a daft name to give a dog!Mike Roland

Crossbenchtory wrote…

Jimmy1989 wrote…

"This broad brush approach, based on skin colour, not only ignores completely the ethnic diversity comprised in the ancestry of New Zealand and it's inhabitants but indicates that you differentiate between people based on the colour of their skin. That is quite disgusting really, isn't it." No, you attempted to draw a disparaging comparison which wasn't conducive to the article or to your own concerns regarding ethnic diversity. & if you read my comment closely, you'd notice my repeated convergence on the n-word & other offensive remarks, which is the substance of the article. My point was that the n-word is recognised, will always be recognised, should always be recognised, as an offensive remark to those of the African diaspora, even if the term is used as a casual, "common greeting". Are you suggesting that Britain should adopt this custom? I find it disgusting that, as a black man, I'm being patronised into a condescending way of thinking that discourages my skin colour & my history, in which the n-word will always be a part of. JK uses this word willy-nilly & I get told to shut up, or at least you are permitted to speak up about your concerns, when I shouldn't have to voice any objection to the word in the first place?

And now, I note that you have brought your skin colour into the discussion, the last refuse of the desperate and again an indication of your own racist tendencies. The fact remains that no word can offensive in and of itself, it is entirely a matter of context. When I hear, or see, the word n... I think of my first Gun Dog, who was a Black Labrador whom I adored and was very upset when he died after many years as an integral part of my family. Hardly offensive one thinks.

What a daft name to give a dog!

Score: -5

welshmen says...8:16pm Sat 3 May 14

Guy Gibson one of the Hero's of The Dam Busters named his black Labrador dog ****, **** died on the 16th May 1943, he was hit by a car outside the Airbase, the same day of the raid....

Guy Gibson one of the Hero's of The Dam Busters named his black Labrador dog ****, **** died on the 16th May 1943, he was hit by a car outside the Airbase, the same day of the raid....welshmen

Guy Gibson one of the Hero's of The Dam Busters named his black Labrador dog ****, **** died on the 16th May 1943, he was hit by a car outside the Airbase, the same day of the raid....

Score: 3

Tttoommy says...10:42pm Sat 3 May 14

melchett wrote…

While reading all these comments on this subject my attention wandered to my bookcase looking for a certain first edition novel by Agatha Christie 1939 cir and there it was, I wonder what she would have made of all this if she was around today..

It became 10 little Indians, is that now 10 little native americans? ;-)

[quote][p][bold]melchett[/bold] wrote:
While reading all these comments on this subject my attention wandered to my bookcase looking for a certain first edition novel by Agatha Christie 1939 cir and there it was, I wonder what she would have made of all this if she was around today..[/p][/quote]It became 10 little Indians, is that now 10 little native americans? ;-)Tttoommy

melchett wrote…

While reading all these comments on this subject my attention wandered to my bookcase looking for a certain first edition novel by Agatha Christie 1939 cir and there it was, I wonder what she would have made of all this if she was around today..

It became 10 little Indians, is that now 10 little native americans? ;-)

Score: -1

TheBrotherhoodOfTheBell says...11:20pm Sat 3 May 14

Mike Roland wrote…

Crossbenchtory wrote…

Jimmy1989 wrote…

"This broad brush approach, based on skin colour, not only ignores completely the ethnic diversity comprised in the ancestry of New Zealand and it's inhabitants but indicates that you differentiate between people based on the colour of their skin. That is quite disgusting really, isn't it." No, you attempted to draw a disparaging comparison which wasn't conducive to the article or to your own concerns regarding ethnic diversity. & if you read my comment closely, you'd notice my repeated convergence on the n-word & other offensive remarks, which is the substance of the article. My point was that the n-word is recognised, will always be recognised, should always be recognised, as an offensive remark to those of the African diaspora, even if the term is used as a casual, "common greeting". Are you suggesting that Britain should adopt this custom? I find it disgusting that, as a black man, I'm being patronised into a condescending way of thinking that discourages my skin colour & my history, in which the n-word will always be a part of. JK uses this word willy-nilly & I get told to shut up, or at least you are permitted to speak up about your concerns, when I shouldn't have to voice any objection to the word in the first place?

And now, I note that you have brought your skin colour into the discussion, the last refuse of the desperate and again an indication of your own racist tendencies. The fact remains that no word can offensive in and of itself, it is entirely a matter of context. When I hear, or see, the word n... I think of my first Gun Dog, who was a Black Labrador whom I adored and was very upset when he died after many years as an integral part of my family. Hardly offensive one thinks.

What a daft name to give a dog!

IT WAS ALRIGHT FOR WING COMMANDER GUY GIBSON OF 617 THE DAMBUSTERS DIDNT HE CALL HIS BLACK Labrador That? he saved our backsides did he not?

[quote][p][bold]Mike Roland[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Crossbenchtory[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Jimmy1989[/bold] wrote:
"This broad brush approach, based on skin colour, not only ignores completely the ethnic diversity comprised in the ancestry of New Zealand and it's inhabitants but indicates that you differentiate between people based on the colour of their skin. That is quite disgusting really, isn't it."
No, you attempted to draw a disparaging comparison which wasn't conducive to the article or to your own concerns regarding ethnic diversity. & if you read my comment closely, you'd notice my repeated convergence on the n-word & other offensive remarks, which is the substance of the article. My point was that the n-word is recognised, will always be recognised, should always be recognised, as an offensive remark to those of the African diaspora, even if the term is used as a casual, "common greeting". Are you suggesting that Britain should adopt this custom? I find it disgusting that, as a black man, I'm being patronised into a condescending way of thinking that discourages my skin colour & my history, in which the n-word will always be a part of. JK uses this word willy-nilly & I get told to shut up, or at least you are permitted to speak up about your concerns, when I shouldn't have to voice any objection to the word in the first place?[/p][/quote]And now, I note that you have brought your skin colour into the discussion, the last refuse of the desperate and again an indication of your own racist tendencies.
The fact remains that no word can offensive in and of itself, it is entirely a matter of context. When I hear, or see, the word n... I think of my first Gun Dog, who was a Black Labrador whom I adored and was very upset when he died after many years as an integral part of my family. Hardly offensive one thinks.[/p][/quote]What a daft name to give a dog![/p][/quote]IT WAS ALRIGHT FOR WING COMMANDER GUY GIBSON OF 617 THE DAMBUSTERS DIDNT HE CALL HIS BLACK Labrador That? he saved our backsides did he not?TheBrotherhoodOfTheBell

Mike Roland wrote…

Crossbenchtory wrote…

Jimmy1989 wrote…

"This broad brush approach, based on skin colour, not only ignores completely the ethnic diversity comprised in the ancestry of New Zealand and it's inhabitants but indicates that you differentiate between people based on the colour of their skin. That is quite disgusting really, isn't it." No, you attempted to draw a disparaging comparison which wasn't conducive to the article or to your own concerns regarding ethnic diversity. & if you read my comment closely, you'd notice my repeated convergence on the n-word & other offensive remarks, which is the substance of the article. My point was that the n-word is recognised, will always be recognised, should always be recognised, as an offensive remark to those of the African diaspora, even if the term is used as a casual, "common greeting". Are you suggesting that Britain should adopt this custom? I find it disgusting that, as a black man, I'm being patronised into a condescending way of thinking that discourages my skin colour & my history, in which the n-word will always be a part of. JK uses this word willy-nilly & I get told to shut up, or at least you are permitted to speak up about your concerns, when I shouldn't have to voice any objection to the word in the first place?

And now, I note that you have brought your skin colour into the discussion, the last refuse of the desperate and again an indication of your own racist tendencies. The fact remains that no word can offensive in and of itself, it is entirely a matter of context. When I hear, or see, the word n... I think of my first Gun Dog, who was a Black Labrador whom I adored and was very upset when he died after many years as an integral part of my family. Hardly offensive one thinks.

What a daft name to give a dog!

IT WAS ALRIGHT FOR WING COMMANDER GUY GIBSON OF 617 THE DAMBUSTERS DIDNT HE CALL HIS BLACK Labrador That? he saved our backsides did he not?

Score: 4

blackburne67 says...1:14am Sun 4 May 14

its all within the context isnt it,I dont accept anything that is malicious but it does niggle me that we get called brits ir brits abroad usually in a derogatory fashion, I.E Pi**ed & its insensative to call somebody overweight "fat" but it seems acceptable to call somebody underweight " skinny" but I think there are more Important, pressing issues to be concerned about in the world than tittle tattle thats in the likes of newspapers such as the Sun & ahem the Dail Fail.Like people starving, violence etc etc wherever, whoever you are in the world.Its all about being fair & nice to each other & striking a balance of keeping a sense of humour.At the same time your never going to please everybody even with the best will in the world.So long as your intentions are good live life to the full & stop worrying, life is tooooooo short :)))

its all within the context isnt it,I dont accept anything that is malicious but it does niggle me that we get called brits ir brits abroad usually in a derogatory fashion, I.E Pi**ed & its insensative to call somebody overweight "fat" but it seems acceptable to call somebody underweight " skinny" but I think there are more Important, pressing issues to be concerned about in the world than tittle tattle thats in the likes of newspapers such as the Sun & ahem the Dail Fail.Like people starving, violence etc etc wherever, whoever you are in the world.Its all about being fair & nice to each other & striking a balance of keeping a sense of humour.At the same time your never going to please everybody even with the best will in the world.So long as your intentions are good live life to the full & stop worrying, life is tooooooo short :)))blackburne67

its all within the context isnt it,I dont accept anything that is malicious but it does niggle me that we get called brits ir brits abroad usually in a derogatory fashion, I.E Pi**ed & its insensative to call somebody overweight "fat" but it seems acceptable to call somebody underweight " skinny" but I think there are more Important, pressing issues to be concerned about in the world than tittle tattle thats in the likes of newspapers such as the Sun & ahem the Dail Fail.Like people starving, violence etc etc wherever, whoever you are in the world.Its all about being fair & nice to each other & striking a balance of keeping a sense of humour.At the same time your never going to please everybody even with the best will in the world.So long as your intentions are good live life to the full & stop worrying, life is tooooooo short :)))

Score: 2

Chippy70 says...8:40am Sun 4 May 14

So, do I take it we will never see any reruns of "Love Thy Neighbour" ....no "honkeys", "cocopops" .....shame that was a very funny show and apparently liked by all.

So, do I take it we will never see any reruns of "Love Thy Neighbour" ....no "honkeys", "cocopops" .....shame that was a very funny show and apparently liked by all.Chippy70

So, do I take it we will never see any reruns of "Love Thy Neighbour" ....no "honkeys", "cocopops" .....shame that was a very funny show and apparently liked by all.

Score: 0

Mike Roland says...10:15am Sun 4 May 14

TheBrotherhoodOfTheB ell wrote…

Mike Roland wrote…

Crossbenchtory wrote…

Jimmy1989 wrote…

"This broad brush approach, based on skin colour, not only ignores completely the ethnic diversity comprised in the ancestry of New Zealand and it's inhabitants but indicates that you differentiate between people based on the colour of their skin. That is quite disgusting really, isn't it." No, you attempted to draw a disparaging comparison which wasn't conducive to the article or to your own concerns regarding ethnic diversity. & if you read my comment closely, you'd notice my repeated convergence on the n-word & other offensive remarks, which is the substance of the article. My point was that the n-word is recognised, will always be recognised, should always be recognised, as an offensive remark to those of the African diaspora, even if the term is used as a casual, "common greeting". Are you suggesting that Britain should adopt this custom? I find it disgusting that, as a black man, I'm being patronised into a condescending way of thinking that discourages my skin colour & my history, in which the n-word will always be a part of. JK uses this word willy-nilly & I get told to shut up, or at least you are permitted to speak up about your concerns, when I shouldn't have to voice any objection to the word in the first place?

And now, I note that you have brought your skin colour into the discussion, the last refuse of the desperate and again an indication of your own racist tendencies. The fact remains that no word can offensive in and of itself, it is entirely a matter of context. When I hear, or see, the word n... I think of my first Gun Dog, who was a Black Labrador whom I adored and was very upset when he died after many years as an integral part of my family. Hardly offensive one thinks.

What a daft name to give a dog!

IT WAS ALRIGHT FOR WING COMMANDER GUY GIBSON OF 617 THE DAMBUSTERS DIDNT HE CALL HIS BLACK Labrador That? he saved our backsides did he not?

Still a daft name for a dog.

[quote][p][bold]TheBrotherhoodOfTheB
ell[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Mike Roland[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Crossbenchtory[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Jimmy1989[/bold] wrote:
"This broad brush approach, based on skin colour, not only ignores completely the ethnic diversity comprised in the ancestry of New Zealand and it's inhabitants but indicates that you differentiate between people based on the colour of their skin. That is quite disgusting really, isn't it."
No, you attempted to draw a disparaging comparison which wasn't conducive to the article or to your own concerns regarding ethnic diversity. & if you read my comment closely, you'd notice my repeated convergence on the n-word & other offensive remarks, which is the substance of the article. My point was that the n-word is recognised, will always be recognised, should always be recognised, as an offensive remark to those of the African diaspora, even if the term is used as a casual, "common greeting". Are you suggesting that Britain should adopt this custom? I find it disgusting that, as a black man, I'm being patronised into a condescending way of thinking that discourages my skin colour & my history, in which the n-word will always be a part of. JK uses this word willy-nilly & I get told to shut up, or at least you are permitted to speak up about your concerns, when I shouldn't have to voice any objection to the word in the first place?[/p][/quote]And now, I note that you have brought your skin colour into the discussion, the last refuse of the desperate and again an indication of your own racist tendencies.
The fact remains that no word can offensive in and of itself, it is entirely a matter of context. When I hear, or see, the word n... I think of my first Gun Dog, who was a Black Labrador whom I adored and was very upset when he died after many years as an integral part of my family. Hardly offensive one thinks.[/p][/quote]What a daft name to give a dog![/p][/quote]IT WAS ALRIGHT FOR WING COMMANDER GUY GIBSON OF 617 THE DAMBUSTERS DIDNT HE CALL HIS BLACK Labrador That? he saved our backsides did he not?[/p][/quote]Still a daft name for a dog.Mike Roland

TheBrotherhoodOfTheB ell wrote…

Mike Roland wrote…

Crossbenchtory wrote…

Jimmy1989 wrote…

"This broad brush approach, based on skin colour, not only ignores completely the ethnic diversity comprised in the ancestry of New Zealand and it's inhabitants but indicates that you differentiate between people based on the colour of their skin. That is quite disgusting really, isn't it." No, you attempted to draw a disparaging comparison which wasn't conducive to the article or to your own concerns regarding ethnic diversity. & if you read my comment closely, you'd notice my repeated convergence on the n-word & other offensive remarks, which is the substance of the article. My point was that the n-word is recognised, will always be recognised, should always be recognised, as an offensive remark to those of the African diaspora, even if the term is used as a casual, "common greeting". Are you suggesting that Britain should adopt this custom? I find it disgusting that, as a black man, I'm being patronised into a condescending way of thinking that discourages my skin colour & my history, in which the n-word will always be a part of. JK uses this word willy-nilly & I get told to shut up, or at least you are permitted to speak up about your concerns, when I shouldn't have to voice any objection to the word in the first place?

And now, I note that you have brought your skin colour into the discussion, the last refuse of the desperate and again an indication of your own racist tendencies. The fact remains that no word can offensive in and of itself, it is entirely a matter of context. When I hear, or see, the word n... I think of my first Gun Dog, who was a Black Labrador whom I adored and was very upset when he died after many years as an integral part of my family. Hardly offensive one thinks.

What a daft name to give a dog!

IT WAS ALRIGHT FOR WING COMMANDER GUY GIBSON OF 617 THE DAMBUSTERS DIDNT HE CALL HIS BLACK Labrador That? he saved our backsides did he not?

Still a daft name for a dog.

Score: 1

rggraham1947 says...7:25pm Mon 5 May 14

Katie Re-Registered wrote…

Of course once again it goes without saying that racism - like any other form of bigotry - is clearly odious, thoroughly irrational and should always be challenged. However, would this 'warning' be coming from the same BBC that panders to a minority of homophobic viewers by continuing to refuse to have same sex dancing couples on its primetime flagship show Strictly Come Dancing? Hypocrisy strikes again! Moreover, I actually feel that organisations and people who continue to do something they know full well is wrong because they calculate that if they stopped doing it then it would might be 'bad for business' or disadvantageous to them are actually worse than the ignorant bigots whose defence is that they're simply too closed-minded to know any better.

You surely wouldn't want to spoil this "wholesome family entertainment". Give same sex dancing couples their own programme, then normal people can avoid it if they want.

[quote][p][bold]Katie Re-Registered[/bold] wrote:
Of course once again it goes without saying that racism - like any other form of bigotry - is clearly odious, thoroughly irrational and should always be challenged. However, would this 'warning' be coming from the same BBC that panders to a minority of homophobic viewers by continuing to refuse to have same sex dancing couples on its primetime flagship show Strictly Come Dancing? Hypocrisy strikes again! Moreover, I actually feel that organisations and people who continue to do something they know full well is wrong because they calculate that if they stopped doing it then it would might be 'bad for business' or disadvantageous to them are actually worse than the ignorant bigots whose defence is that they're simply too closed-minded to know any better.[/p][/quote]You surely wouldn't want to spoil this "wholesome family entertainment". Give same sex dancing couples their own programme, then normal people can avoid it if they want.rggraham1947

Katie Re-Registered wrote…

Of course once again it goes without saying that racism - like any other form of bigotry - is clearly odious, thoroughly irrational and should always be challenged. However, would this 'warning' be coming from the same BBC that panders to a minority of homophobic viewers by continuing to refuse to have same sex dancing couples on its primetime flagship show Strictly Come Dancing? Hypocrisy strikes again! Moreover, I actually feel that organisations and people who continue to do something they know full well is wrong because they calculate that if they stopped doing it then it would might be 'bad for business' or disadvantageous to them are actually worse than the ignorant bigots whose defence is that they're simply too closed-minded to know any better.

You surely wouldn't want to spoil this "wholesome family entertainment". Give same sex dancing couples their own programme, then normal people can avoid it if they want.

Score: 0

rggraham1947 says...7:33pm Mon 5 May 14

melchett wrote…

While reading all these comments on this subject my attention wandered to my bookcase looking for a certain first edition novel by Agatha Christie 1939 cir and there it was, I wonder what she would have made of all this if she was around today..

Just to clear something up, what are the actual words of the nursery rhyme in question?

[quote][p][bold]melchett[/bold] wrote:
While reading all these comments on this subject my attention wandered to my bookcase looking for a certain first edition novel by Agatha Christie 1939 cir and there it was, I wonder what she would have made of all this if she was around today..[/p][/quote]Just to clear something up, what are the actual words of the nursery rhyme in question?rggraham1947

melchett wrote…

While reading all these comments on this subject my attention wandered to my bookcase looking for a certain first edition novel by Agatha Christie 1939 cir and there it was, I wonder what she would have made of all this if she was around today..

Just to clear something up, what are the actual words of the nursery rhyme in question?

Score: 0

Sorry, an error occurred.

Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the 'report this post' link.

Ipsoregulated

This website and associated newspapers adhere to the Independent Press Standardards Organisations's Editors' Code of Practice. If you have a compaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then please contact the editor here. If you are dissatisfied with the response provided you can contact IPSO here